Reisner v Bridge Housing Limited [2019] NSWCATAP 109

Reisner v Bridge Housing Limited [2019] NSWCATAP 109

Bridge Housing Limited was entitled to bring proceedings as landlord because s 13A of the Housing Act 2001 (NSW) substituted it for LAHC as landlord for the period of the concurrent lease, or alternatively made it a successor in title within the definition of landlord in the Residential Tenancies Act 2010 (NSW). The concurrent lease commenced on 10 July 2017 because the July 2017 correspondence and incorporated lease documents created an immediately binding agreement notwithstanding later execution on 27 September 2017. The evidence supported the rent arrears order for $11,199.24 for the period 30 August 2017 to 27 November 2018, and the challenge to the notice of termination failed...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
30 April 2019
Procedural Posture
Residential Tenancy Appeal / Appeal Panel Appeal From a Consumer and Commercial Division Decision Dated 27 November 2018
Outcome
The appeal is dismissed.
Legal Topics
['concurrent Lease' 'registered Community Housing Provider' 'landlord Standing' 'rent Arrears' 'notice of Termination']
['residential Tenancies' 'housing Law' 'administrative Law'] ['concurrent Lease' 'registered Community Housing Provider' 'landlord Standing' 'rent Arrears' 'notice of Termination']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Residential Tenancy Appeal / Appeal Panel Appeal From a Consumer and Commercial Division Decision Dated 27 November 2018

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether Bridge Housing Limited was a landlord within the meaning of the Residential Tenancies Act 2010 (NSW) after entering into a concurrent lease with NSW Land and Housing Corporation.' 'Whether there was a residential tenancy agreement enforceable by Bridge Housing Limited against Ms Reisner.' 'Whether the concurrent lease commenced on 10 July 2017 or only when the formal lease was executed on 27 September 2017.' 'Whether the Tribunal erred in finding rent arrears of $11,199.24 and in finding the notice of termination dated 24 October 2017 valid.']

Ratio Decidendi

Bridge Housing Limited was entitled to bring proceedings as landlord because s 13A of the Housing Act 2001 (NSW) substituted it for LAHC as landlord for the period of the concurrent lease, or alternatively made it a successor in title within the definition of landlord in the Residential Tenancies Act 2010 (NSW). The concurrent lease commenced on 10 July 2017 because the July 2017 correspondence and incorporated lease documents created an immediately binding agreement notwithstanding later execution on 27 September 2017. The evidence supported the rent arrears order for $11,199.24 for the period 30 August 2017 to 27 November 2018, and the challenge to the notice of termination failed...

Court Disposition

The appeal is dismissed.

Orders

  • ['The appeal is dismissed.']